Featured The elect are choice meat?

Ｍａｔｔ Ｅｓｔｅｓ on Twitter

Dr. Flowers man-centered theology coming out.

 

Read it and cry.

 

He said choice meats, something that moves ppl to them. That’s how he defined choice in election. There was nothing ‘choice’ in the elect that attracted God to them. He elected them based on nothing good in them...because there’s not, but Himself.

 

What Dr. Flowers is saying is that God’s election is favor. And it is that, unmerited favor, grace. However, this is not based on those He favors. If there is something favorable in the one He chooses, then that no longer is grace, unmerited favor. There was something in them that merited His favor. That’s not grace at all.

 

He compared election to choice. Then he used the choice meats section a an example of choosing those choice meats because they were, well, choice.

Election is unconditional, as He never based His choosing someone based on who and/or what they are.

 

He said that the quality of meat is what makes it choice. He stated choice in that instance is an adverb that describes what type of it is, choice. Carry that over to election. He still has God choosing some over others, just that those who have better quality(characteristics) are chosen by Him and the other lesser cuts of meat are left to themselves.

 

In his zeal to do away with unconditional election, he has opened another can of worms.

 

Go to the link in the OP. That video is only 43 seconds long. He mentioned election and then used choice. He then used choice meats as an example of why ppl are drawn to them.

 

Leighton Flowers (transcription of oral comments):

"When we ask about election, we're talking about mainly God having favor - Him choosing somebody over someone else. Matter of fact, when we use the word "choice," a lot of times we're thinking of kind of the verb form of it, like, "I made a choice between these options." But if you go into the grocery store, later today, and you go to the "choice meat" section. The word "choice" there is used more as an adjective. It's describing the type of meat. It's the type of meat that is favorable over the other lesser favorable meat. And so when you talk about something that is choice, you are not always talking about necessarily God choosing something for no apparent reason, but you're choosing that meat because it's a favorable meat. There's a reason to have the choice of that meat."

I got this transcript from Thoughts of Francis Turretin: Responding to Leighton Flowers' "Choice Beef" Argument

Dr. Flowers, from the get go, speaks about election. He then carries that over to the choice meats analogy. He talks about how choice meats are more favorable than less favorable meat. He is using that analogy to describe, in his view, how God elects, chooses those who are saved. Those who are more favorable are those He elected. No way getting around that. And by doing so, He passed over the lesser favorable meats. Either way, he has God passing over ppl.

 

Thank you! That's been my point the whole time.

If God chose us based on our own merits? Whew boy! Universal damnation. None would be saved.

 

Honestly, I think he knew exactly what he was saying. He’s been saying it for years.

Yes, it was an unfortunate use of words. We’ve all had our Freudian slips. But this was his intention, it just came back to bite him...HARD!